Every day, glowies

Every day, glowies.

Attached: billionaires.png (391x327, 12.11K)

Does that mean nobody should own a company worth over a billion or you just can't have more than a billion in your bank account?

Please explain to me why someone whose net worth is $999,999,999.99 should be allowed to keep their money but someone whose net worth is $1,000,000,000.01 deserves to have their money forcibly confiscated and redistributed.

I'd say you can have as much as you can get as long as your workers aren't exploited and have wages that can allow them comfortable life

strawman

What is a comfortable life? And is it exploitation by definition to make money from someone else's labour?

Let me be devils advocate. But they have a comfortable life user, they have 2 television, a computer tower, a laptop, a tablet, 2 cars, a last gen cellphone. What do they want more?

Not an answer

They want what someone else has.

they'd be progressively taxed before they ever hit 1 billion you dumb memeflag.

I got a better one:

“Usurers and unfair/immoral profiteers shouldn’t exist”
Or
“Central bankers shouldn’t exist”

Why do you want to kill jews?

well obviously everyone will always want more than they have but having the things you listed puts them well above average (at least in my country). they should be glad and not complaining. the only reason I can think of for them not being satisfied is that they don't realize how lucky they are

You are a shit brain. Do you not understand that this is relative? People in your country are rich compared to African niggers. Should they just say "well all those people who have electrity are spoiled and don't realize how lucky they are. Nobody should have more than 3 electrical devices." Did anyone (literally anyone) in medieval times have a comfortable life by your definition?

>What is a comfortable life?
Being financialy independent imo
>And is it exploitation by definition to make money from someone else's labour?
It's not. very few people are able to make money on their own so working for someone else normal. if you split profits in a ratio that is fair to both sides it's perfectly fine

Still not an answer. What makes the first person good and the second one bad? In the example, the only thing separating them is 2 cents, yet that makes one a billionaire and the other merely a millionaire.

fuck zuck and fuck bezos
oh and fuck jannies

I'm not saying that it applies to everyone. i meant it from european point of view. for people in africa, comfortable life would be the one where they can afford food and other basic commodities.

They also have a comfy, crippling, debt.

Not refuting a straw man argument doesn't validate your criticism, good sir.

Also, you're gay.

Attached: libtarians.jpg (275x183, 13.89K)

Every year the major publications should print a global rich list as they do already, but call it the greed list and have a photo of the winner on the front cover with the caption 'the worlds greediest man'

Is the boot leather that far down your throat that you're shilling for billionaires with a shitty technicality?
To answer the oddly loaded question, nothing is different about the 2 individuals and neither should exist. There's an actual sentiment behind "billionaires shouldn't exist" and it isn't talking about a literal exact number.

That’s very anti-semetic

It's too simplistic. Answer me this, why shouldn't they exist? If a person becomes a billionaire through hard work, honest and ethical business practices, and good customer services, why should he not be allowed to exist?

If you cut all the gambling, scams, gibs, impunity, ... very few billionaires would exist.
If every cluster B shithead got killed or blocked from any activity where they can annoy people, it would be even better.

Brilliant rhetoric, by calling me a homosexual you have thoroughly demonstrated the veracity of your argument and undermined my own without needing to address the question. I commend your rhetorical skill and abilities in the bedroom.

ok commie

>very few billionaires would exist
This is true. But should those that remain be allowed to keep their wealth?

Because the second number is over a billion. Are you illiterate or something?

>If a person becomes a billionaire through hard work, honest and ethical business practices, and good customer services.
Therein lies the problem. There's no ethical way for one individual to accumulate that much wealth on their own. Even if you made 1 million dollars every month it would take you around 83 years to make just 1 billion dollars. "Billionaires shouldn't exist" implies that no one should be allowed to hoard such an enormous amount of wealth, and policies that would make it more difficult to become a billionaire would also disincentivize people from pursuing the unethical or exploitative tactics to become one.

Probably. But I also don't think that getting upset about their wealth is even worth the effort. Your country already spends money at a trillion dollar deficit yearly. What use is their wealth going to do. It wouldn't even put a dent in that or the federal debt. I guess it's the assertion that if they didn't have it, someone else would and it would do more good in their hands. Maybe, maybe not. We're obviously talking about taxing it and using it for something else. What else would they do with it other than more social programs, worthless social programs that do more harm than good. Maybe if they gave tax breaks to the middle class.

>What use is their wealth going to do.
mike bloomberg literally just bought biden the nomination a few months ago

the billionaire class is subverting democracy to enrich themselves at the direct cost of the american people who overwhelmingly reject globalism.

Attached: bloomkike2.jpg (900x603, 78K)